Reading Texts

Eva Nur Mazidah
120710209
Reading Texts
Final Examination





Damar Kurung of Gresik as the Cultural Representation of Past History

As time goes on, Indonesian cultures change because of orientation movement. Many cultural heritages evolve, develop, and even disappear because of many aspects. These cultural heritages appear as cultural representation of their people. They have such deep meaning towards its manifestation. It is believed that cultures can tell the history too. One of Indonesian cultures is work of art. Every region has their own traditional arts and one of them is Gresik, East Java, with its Damar Kurung (Darmar Kurung is a lampion with paintings on its cover) taken from word Damar (Lamp) and Kurung (like cage). I would like to explain the history of Damar Kurung, Damar Kurung as visual art, and the meaning of Damar Kurung for Gresik people.
According to local story of Gresik people, Damar Kurung firstly existed in the time of Sunan Prapen (XVI AC). He is one of people who spread Islam in Gresik the descendent of Sunan Giri (Koeshandari, 2009). Basically, one of the ways Islam was spread in Indonesia is through Cultures by enculturation, assimilation, etc. in order to be accepted by local people. Those people tried to blend Islamic culture with local culture which were Buddhist, Hindu, Animism and Dynamism. In short, the result of the hybridization of these cultures is a new culture and one of the results was found in Damar Kurung.
Damar Kurung becomes more complex in its philosophical ground because it represents the mix of Buddist and Hindu values, Islamic values, and local people tradition. Since it was as old as Sunan Prapen, the emphasis is that Damar Kurung painting has specific symbols as other religions have (for example Buddhist and Hindu with relief and statues in temple, Catholics with its pagan symbols, etc.). Turner in Koeshadari (2009) said that the symbol is the smallest unit of ritual that maintains particular properties of ritual behavior. Without knowing their truth, those religions always use such symbols through metaphor, myths, tales, holy books, songs, etc. These also happen in the stories given in Damar Kurung.
No one knows how the first shape of Damar Kurung at the age of Sunan Prapen. The last thing we know about Damar Kurung is made by Mbah Masmundari from Gresik. It is explained in Koeshandari that Damar Kurung is particularly given from generation to generation. Unfortunately, as Mbah Masnundari passed away several years ago, it is going to be difficult to revive again Damar Kurung as part of culture. Mbah Masmundari made Damar Kurung with a new shape painted on fiberglass. Still she used “rules” in painting her Damar Kurung. It is believed that Damar Kurung is categorized as naivetiesm. It depicts myths, tales, holy books and daily activities within its paintings.
Damar Kurung used to function as a lampion decorated with paper and paintings made on bamboo. It was used by people in Ramadhan month (Fasting month of Moeslems) in cemeteries as lamp. People usually visit cemeteries in thet month. It then changed to be used when children played during Ramadhan until Idul Fitri (the end of Ramadhan). In the late of 1980s and the early of 1990, Damar Kurung used electric lamp and it was put in living room or as decorating lamp.
The problem, after all, is not on the point how it looks like or it functions, but how it can portray myths, histories, traditions, and Gresik people inside the story of Damar Kurung paintings.
Soemantri in Koeshandari (2009) said that the concept, applications, and technology of Indonesian traditional art and crafts reflect various degrees of spirituality. It van be proved by, for instance, in the relief of Borobudur temple in Yogyakarta. It narrates certain story about Buddhist and how human should live. It delivers certain messages not mere relief. It is really influenced by the values of that religion at that time. Such thing happens in Damar Kurung. It has certain ways in telling its stories. If Venus of Willandorf can tell how primitive people wanted the fertility, Egypt lithographs showed how everything was calculated, Damar Kurung tells how Gresik people are influenced by Islamic values.
There are two parts of Damar Kurung which can be shared in other cultures, the first is its lampion and the second is its painting in fiber glass. Upon the lampion, basically, the similar thing can be found in Bali when they have Ngaben ceremony (ceremony for death). Faber glass painting can also be found in Cirebon, Madura, Banyuwangi, etc. They use painting as medium to tell certain messages about Islamic values. Somehow, it is still a bit different. The functions of lamp as an enlightenment and fiber glass or paper to paint certain messages are combined in one holistic work of art represented in Damar Kurung. Thus it can be said as combination of the two distinct works of art which has usage value and high art value.
Mbah Masmundari’s Damar Kurung are inspired by Babad Gresik (the history of Gresik) and portrait of her daily life experience. But still we can see the influence of stylistic of wayang kulit, wayang beber, and relief in temple in her drawings. Since the ability to draw Damar Kurung of Masmundari is given generation to generation, the transformation of ideology in drawing is obvious.
Another fact about the paintings that is also found in Damar Kurung is that they are imaginative and exaggerate the shape of things e.g. humans, trees, and other objects. It may be the basic concept within humans’ mindset that exaggerating is important. It can be seen from the shape, the color, and so forth. In short, this ideology has also been transferred to this work of art.
The drawing might answer the question in visual cultures that the ideology given within the subject is prevalent (Fuery and Mansfield, 2000). Here, Damar Kurung as the visual reflects the culture and it has contribution in the production, reproduction, and mutation of such culture. Fuery and Mansfield also argued that the visual also become a bridge to the past journey. Masmundari’s Damar Kurung may say that the paintings can give education implicitly how good values lives in our surroundings.
Based on the objects drawn in Damar Kurung , temple has Cara Wimba (how the sequence of object is made or drawn) and Isi Wimba (how the object is put orderly as sequence of scene and what symbols are used to tell certain story), and so does Damar Kurung. Its stories are also divided into genres because different theme uses different Isi Wimba. It is also influenced by the model in relief of temple, indeed. As explained before, Islamic culture in Indonesia is the hybrid of local cultures e.g. Buddhist and Hindu. Therefore it is also depicted in Damar Kurung painting. In conclusion, see the table below.


Genre Theme Cara Wimba
Sight-seeing Meaning and structure of expression
Sacred • Idul Fitri celebration
• Pengajian (Islamic service)
• Ikan duyung (Mermaid)
• “Raja Mina’s show”
• Syukuran (Thanksgiving)
• Pasar Bandeng (Bandeng Market)
• Top to down
• Right to left

The story starts from the right side

Prasawya

A formline represent a sequence
Profane • Activities around house
• Activieties in markets
• Festivals • Bottom to up
• Right to left

The story starts from anywhere the reader likes

Pradaksina

Dream time

There are several important things about Damar Kurung made by Mbah Masmundari. Isi Wimba is basically the object drawn for instance a coconut tree. Cara Wimba is how this coconut tree is drawn including the size, angle, scale, perspective, etc. Structure of expression tells how to organize Isi Wimba and its Cara Wimba in a frame so that we can get the message given trough the images. About the concept of Prasawya and Pradaksina, we can fin them also in relief in temple e.g. in Borobudur. They show the symbolism of the Stupa (part of temple) (Koesjandari, 2009). Prasawya shows the heaven’s life (the world above) while Pradaksina shows the life on Earth (humans). Seeing the genre above, Prasawya deals with sacred themes e.g. religion, cultures, and myths in Gresik. Those themes may remind us to our life in here after because basically Moslems believe in the hereafter world. It also influences how we read Damar Kurung, that is from top to down. Profane genre deals with daily activities that usually happen in Earth, human’s life. Thus, the story goes bottom up. Another important distinctive point of Damar Kurung is dream time concept. It is actually from the pre-historical primitive story at which they do not use chronological term in seeing some things. They can read that from wherever they like.
Image 1


Image 2

Seeing the images above, Holm in Koeshandari (2009) says that there are some influence of symbols and language of drawing given in Damar Kurung. The first is stylizing that shows the style of drawing opposes the reality though it tells about daily activity (as opposed to realistic representation. Second part is the illogical transformation of details into new representation. If you look at the images, they are colored in unnatural way. The shapes are also quit irrelevant in some places. The third is the schematic characterization by accentuating certain features. Symbols on scheme are unchanged. Isi wimba are about humans, bird, trees, lamps, horse, chicken, etc. which are drawn with “en profil” and “en face” techniques and the shape of hands and legs are obvious. The use of colors, dots, zig-zag lines, arrows, etc. are also important to know how to read Damar Kurung.
In conclusion, Damar Kurung can be regarded visual art of Gresik cultures. It portrays values penetrated in Gresik people. The stories within Damar Kurung are not mere have-fun paintings but it has deep value toward its aspects, the objects drawn, and the way they are arranged. They have rules in its production process. We have to see that Damar Kurung is also the development and hybridization of Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic cultures with local cultures which ideology is perpetuated through the paintings on the Damar Kurung.


REFERENCES

Koeshandari, Ika Ismoedijahwati. (2009). Damar Kurung Dari Masa Ke Masa. Surabaya: Dewan Kesenian Jawa Timur.
Fuery, Patrick and Mansfield, Nick. (2000). Cultural Studies and Critical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Discourse Analysis

Anita 120710208
Eva Nur Mazidah 120710209
Apriana Bunga S 120710210
Rita Puspitaningrum 120710246
Hendra Bangkit 120710

A. Argumentation : the Evaluation follows from the ‘facts’.

The passage has given several arguments. We find them from each of the paragraph. Here are the arguments and the implicit arguments put in brackets.
• Recently it is seen that Jews’ force of force has intoxicated us. [it has even also been done since 2,000 years ago]
• Jewish population thought that military force could be used to achieve any goal.
• The force before 1967 was used as a last resort and since the Six-Day War, every problem has to be solved with the force [justify the use of force].
• Violent on humanitarian aid shows that what can be done by force has to be handled with a greater force. [Israel has to do it to solve the problem]
• Hamas is not just a terrorist organization [Hamas is a threat to solve whatever the way].
• To solve the problem, Hamas has to make as agreement with Palestinians about the borders [Hamas has to sign the agreement as in the 1967 borders].
• Force can not solve the problem and force is effective as preventive [each side has supporters; if one gives force, another gives a counter force]
• Israel uses the force to survive—self-defense.

Conclusion : If Hamas does not sign the agreement, it will lead to other disasters. Everyone wants peace. [Sign the agreement and Israel will stop its force to Palestinians].

The style of the writer is a bit tricky. At first he shows how Israel has used force to solve problem as if he said that Israel were mean to Palestinians. He then shows that Hamas is not just a terrorist organization. He puts Hamas as the core of the problem in Palestine. He then proposes that ‘Israel’ has to sign the peace agreement with President Mahmoud Abbas. His proposal implicitly shows that Israel has been suffered by Palestinian and Hamas because they do not sign the peace agreement so that there is no other way save justifying the use force to Palestinians and Hamas.

B.The rhetorical figures found in the article “Israeli Force, Adrift on the Sea”:

One hyperbolic of “their” negative action is found the sentences “But Hamas is not just a terrorist. Hams is an idea, a desperate and fanatical idea that grew of the desolation and frustration of many Palestinians.” Those two sentences give a notion that actually Hams is the one responsible for for the force done by Israel. It is also indirectly stated that Hamas is the antagonist actor behind the conflict between Israel and Palestine in Gaza.
The next sentences “No idea has ever been defeated by force—not by siege, not by bombardment, not by being flattened with tank treads, and not by marine commandos. To defeat an idea, ypu have to offer a better idea, a more attractive and acceptable one” indirectly show that it was as if a right thing to defeat Hamas. It was as if meant that Hamas should be defeated, but not by using force. This is a kind of understatement of “our” negative action. The action of defeating Hamas—a desperate and fanatical idea of desolate Palestinians—is justifiable as long as it is not by force.
The 6th paragraph of the article really shows how the writer understates “our” negative action. Again, here he justifies the act of “edging out” Hamas. The act of taking over Palestinian’s land is considered (by the writer) a justifiable independence-action. By putting the conflict only between Gaza and Israel or Hamas and Israel, people are made believe that the act of taking over Gaza is really justifiable. And if seen only as a conflict between hams and Israel, the conflict become less problematic and peopleprobably become less aware that even though the conflict only happens in Gaza, the act of taking over it is actually a kind of colonization.
Another understatement of “our” negative action is on the next sentence “Until Israelis and Palestinians recognize the logical consequences of this simple fact, we will all live in a permanent state of siege—Gaza under an Israel siege, Israel under an international and Arabs siege.” It seems that the condition of Israel being under International and Arabs siege is a mistake of their (Israelis and Palestinians’) not having an agreement about Gaza. The writer even indirectly states that the siege of International worlds and Arabs is a part of Palestinian mistake. There is a sense that Palestinians are mistaken of a permanent siege that the two countries got. Furthermore, he justifies indirectly that the siege of Israelis towards Palestinians is, again, justifiable.
In the last paragraph, we will find another understatement of “our” negative action in the sentence “…that force is effective only as a preventative—to prevent destruction and conquest of Israel…, but instead a means of smashing problems and squashing ideas will lead to disasters, just like one we brought on ourselves in international water, opposite Gaza’s shores”. Firstly, it is stated that the siege is justifiable a s long as it is for preventative purpose/ however, it is not right anymore if it is used for smashing problems and squashing ideas. And instead of mentioning the impact of the Israeli force towards Palestinians (how many people died, how many schools, mosques, and houses were broken down and burnt up, how much physical and psychological pains they suffered), he mentions the impact of the force toward the Israelis themselves. He says that it was Israelis who got the problems of the force they’ve done. He does not even blame Israelis for having caused physical and psychological damage towards Palestinians. He only states that Israeli force should be blamed because it only gives more disasters to Israelis themselves in international world. He does not even show guilt or apology for Palestinians.
C. Lexical Style
There are some word choices which have implied meaning whether if it is positive or negative evaluation, such as:
• “force”
It gas implied meaning “war”. It has positive implied meaning instead of the use of “war”. Te use of “war” has greater negative sense than “force” one.
• “to a man with a big hammer, says the proverb, every problem looks like a nail”
This sentence has negative implied meaning. It means that Israeli is symbolized as a man who has a big hammer, then he will destroy everything related to Palestine, associated as a nail. A nail which is looked very small for a big hammer.
• “frustration”
It has negative implied meaning. This word is refered commonly to the human psychological condition. I this case, the implied meaning explains that Palestine is disappointed and anger by what actually Israeli done to them.
• “negotiation”
It has negative implied meaning, instead of “agreement”. It is used commonly in the trade field. In contrast, “agreement” has better sense in this discourse.


D. Story Telling: telling above negative events as a personally experienced; giving plausible details above negative features of the events.

In the case of Israel and Hamas, in fact Israel used the power to defeat or destroy Hamas. The writer assumes that force cannot be used to fight against Hamas because Hamas is an idea which only can be defeat by the better or a more attractive idea. In other words, force or war which was done by Israel to defeat Hamas is not a good solution to solve the problem. It only makes the raising problem between Israel and Hamas. In the text above, we can see that the writer is not a Palestinian by the sentence: “ We are not alone in Jerussalem and the Palestinian are not alone in Jerussalem”. But here, he doesn’t agree with the Israel’s way to solve the problems by fighting against Hamas in Palestina. The best solution as the writer states is by doing an agreement between both sides ( Israel and Hamas), not by forcing, bombardment, being flattened with tank treads.

SEMINAR

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1. 1 Background of the Study
We find arguments in our daily life. Language is here used not only to tell jokes, sing songs, recite poems, offer helps, say prayers, and so on but also to state arguments Argument does not mean a sentence per se. Argument needs reasons and proof to strengthen (Weston 1992, Van Eemeren et al. 1997, Greg et al. 2002). Commonly, in debate there are two sides arguing, positive side and negative side. They indeed oppose each other. If we take a look at the history, debating activity even happened thousands years ago. It flashed back to the era of Aristotle, ancient Greek. They used writings to show their argumentation so there were several terms used for instance logic (proof), rhetoric (persuasion) and dialects (inquiry).
In accordance with, Discourse Analysis, one of the studies of genre analysis is argumentation discourse (Paltridge, 2000). Before explaining further, there are various definitions about argument. Van Eemeren et al. (1997) say that argumentation uses language to justify or refute a standpoint, with the aim of securing agreement in views. According to Ericson, Murphy, and Zeuscher (2003), argument is an assertion that implies the result of reasoning or proof. In accordance with the argument, Wittig in The Aims of Arguments stated (2003), “The basic agreement between human beings is the language.” It is impossible to argue without using language. While arguing, we also think of words, phrases, sentences which can covey our idea, opinions, and feelings. In critical thinking, argument also refers to reasons: identifying reasons, evaluating reasons, and giving reasons. The logical link between argument and language is quite clear. As listeners or readers we may rely on our background, ideology, knowledge, experiences either to refuse or accept their arguments. How we actually react upon them is through analyzing the language. Since the notion of semantics is to analyze language in Context of Utterance—to infer what argument means, argumentative discourse is one of its extents.
One of activities that I have observed for years concerning argumentative discourse is debate competition. Ericson et al. (2003) stated:

“Debate is one of the oldest activities of civilization. Calm, orderly, debate, in which speakers argue for acceptance of various answers to a given question, is an obvious feature of modern parliaments and congresses…In modern democratic societies, the right to debate is a priceless asset. It enables any citizen to propose a better plan of action than the one that ruling power sets forth. If the speaker can convince enough citizens that the new idea is a better one, he speaker can change the policy of the city, country, state, or even nation.”

Debate is of course with arguments but some people may use different characteristics in delivering their arguments and it is interesting for me to observe. What is researched in this thesis is the characteristics of argument and their flaws based on Toulmin’s Layout of Argument. Van Eemeren, Grootendorst, Jacksons, ans Jacobs (1997) argued, “Toulmin’s theory takes judicial attention on the interchange between two opposing arguer roles. The measurement of this consistency is by Toulmin’s claim, ground, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal (Toulmin, 1969).
One of pioneers executing High School Debate Competition (HSDC) in Surabaya is English Department of Airlangga university of Surabaya. What usually happens in debaters’ argument, especially high school debaters, is that they often forget to make their arguments effective. There are abundant argumentations that fail to give solid proofs and logical link toward the motion or theme so that it is possible that their argument becomes so-what arguments. Thus, Toulmin’s layout of argument can be applied to analyze their argument and see whether they have been able to make their argument solid and effective.
The study is focused in the semifinal round. For this round, they debate upon the motion “This House Will Ban Junk Food”. It means that the first team comes as the Government proposing and arguing this theme to debate and another team has to give counter arguments to oppose government’s proposal to ban junk food. In this competition, debaters debate by following Australasian Parliamentary System (APS). APS has two team debating and each team consists of three speakers and four roles, namely first, second, third, and reply-speakers. They have time to deliver their substantive speech for 7 minutes and 20 seconds (maximum time). Based on the model of debate, it is compatible to analyze debate argumentation by using Toulmin’s layout of argument because every argument they make has to be understandable and solid.
Talking about argumentative discourse, there is an abundance of research held based on this discourse and Toulmin’s theory. In 1987, Cohen’s article entitled Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse focused on a model for analysis of arguments which include a theory of linguistics clues. Other article was Syverson’s patterns and process of reasoning in virtual world in 1998. An old theory of Aristotle also becomes the ground of argumentative discourse. His theory is ‘syllogism’ used in Greek writings and logic (proof), rhetoric (persuasion), and dialect (inquiry).
Furthermore, there are some studies made based on Toulmin’s theory. Enduran, Simon, and Osborne (2004) wrote an article by the title TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for Studying Science Discourse in the classroom. Gorski, Cyra, Jarzebowicz, and Miler in 2008 also wrote about Toulmin model of argument in trust cases. In 2007, Jamaludin, Ho, and Chee wrote about The Impact of Structured Argumentation Board and Enactive Role Play on Students’ Argumentative Writing Skills. It reports the impact of using a structured argument and enactive role play in Second Life on students’ argumentative writing skills in the context of the A-level subject General Paper by using quantitative method.
So far, the articles reviewed above are mostly about writings and spoken argumentation in judicial courts. The discussion about debate itself is mostly about teaching debate. Therefore, the study of my thesis is the use of Toulmin’s layout of argument in analyzing argumentation in debate competition. It is obvious that linguistically the argumentative discourse—in Toulmin’s theory—is worth analyzing: how far it influences and be applied in the argumentation analysis used by society.
One of the aims of argument is to provide mature reasoning (Crusius and Channel, 2003). While analyzing the elements of argument, Toulmin proposes a general view of the generic structure of an argument (Toulmin 1969, Van Dijk 1997, Fairclough 2003, Rottenberg 1988). There are mainly three characteristics namely claim, data, and warrant (Van Dijk 1997, Fairclough 2003). Toulmin (1969) further adds backing, rebuttal, and qualifier to his layout of arguments. In this case, he defines claim as the statement being argued (a thesis); data (ground or support) as the fact or evidence to prove the argument; warrant as the general hypothetical (and often implicit) logical statements that serve as bridges between the claim and data-logical link; qualifier is a statement that limit the strength of the argument or statement that proposes the condition under which argument is true; rebuttal is the counter argument or statement indicating circumstances when general argument does not seem true; and backing is a statement that supports warrant to be true. When the speaker has already fulfilled at six characteristics, namely claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier and rebuttal, his argumentation is considered sound arguments because in mature reasoning the speaker is demanded to show logical links in their arguments (Toulmin, 1969). Therefore, this study observes the use of argumentation analysis by the debaters in High School Debate Competition and be analyzed in qualitative way and the goals of this study are to see the use of Toulmin’s model of argumentation applied by debaters and to know the flaws they make in delivering their arguments.
1.2 Research Questions
Based on the phenomenon above, there are some research question to be discussed further as below.
1. What are the characteristics of argumentation used by high school debaters in delivering their arguments?
2. What flaws do they make in their arguments according to Toulmin’s layout of argument?
1.3 Objective of the Study
This study observes the use of argumentation analysis by the debaters in High School Debate Competition. The motion or theme of this debate is This House (Parliament or Government) will ban junk food. The goals of this study are to see the characteristics of argumentation used by high school debaters in delivering their arguments and to know the flaws they make in delivering their arguments. From the finding, the readers may have the insight on how to prepare and arrange sound argumentations. On the other hand, since it is a purposive study, therefore, the result of this study may not be able to be generalized for all debaters. It is due to the fact that most of debaters may have their own way in packaging their argument delivery. Basically the notions of argument are similar; they have to prove the audience that it is logic and is not mere assumption.
1.4 Significance of the Study
The attempt of this study is to analyze debate by using argumentative discourse. It is hoped that it will contribute other point of views to study discourse in debate by focusing on its argumentation analysis. Besides that, by reading this thesis, it is hoped that readers especially teachers and coaches have insight how to prepare students or debaters to join English debate competition. For students, they know what skills they need to understand when they join in debate competition and know how to make sound argumentations whenever they are debating.
1.5 Definition of Key Terms
1. Argumentation: the process of developing or presenting an argument; reasoning. (Hornby, 2005)
2. Backing : something which its precise relations to data, claim, warrants, and condition of rebuttal deserve some clarification (Toulmin, 2003). In this case it becomes a further back up for warrant and other characteristics. It shows the logical link to the argumentation.
3. Claim : a conclusion whose merits we are seeking to establish (Toulmin, 2003). It shows speaker’s thesis or idea that s/he wants to prove within the argumentation.
4. Data : the facts we appeal to as a foundation for a claim (Toulmin, 2003). In this case, it gives evidence and or proof to show that a claim is considerable and not assumption.
5. Debate : a formal discussion of an issue at a public meeting or in a parliament. In a debate a two or more speakers express opposing views and then there is often a vote on the issue (Hornby, 2005)
6. Layout of arguments: the pattern of arguments or the way arguments are set (Toulmin, 2003)
7. Motion : a formal proposal that is discussed and voted on a meeting (Hornby, 2005)
8. Qualifier : explicit reference to the degree of force which data confer on claim in virtue of warrant (Toulmin, 2003). It is the hedging given to a claim. It indicates how strong the claim that the speaker makes.
9. Rebuttal : Condition of exception (Toulmin, 2003). It shows what can be conflicting viewpoints in audiences’ mind.
10. This House : a group of people discussing something in a formal debate (Hornby, 2005)
11. Warrant : the soundness of all arguments of the appropriate type (Toulmin, 2003). It firstly serves the logical link between data and claim to show that a claim and data are not nonsense.



CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Frameworks

In 1958, the turning point came up showing the development of argumentation studies after an old theory of Aristotle, syllogism. Syllogism was used to show logic, rhetoric, and dialect. In the rush of dialectification, Toulmin’s work became the central. He proposed that by regarding substantive context, argument could be viewed as the offering of claim along with answers to characteristics questions. He still used the premises of classical logic. Somehow it differs from a classical model of argument. He focused on the functional relationship not on the formal relationship (Van Eemeren et al, 1997).
Talking layout of argument, Toulmin believed that argument is structured as an organism. He made such analogy in order to convince that within the structures of argument, there were parts which functioned as a finer structure. He also noted that within the physiological level lied the idea of logical form. Basically all these notions referring to the layout of arguments can help us achieve the logic of arguments.
Logic meant in this study, as acknowledged by Aristotle was concerned with the ways in which men thought, argued, and inferred (Toulmin, 2003). Toulmin himself (2003) saw logic concerned with the soundness of the claim as we made, with the solidity of the grounds we produced to support them, and the firmness of the backing we provided in defense of our claims. Therefore, a sound argument (logic argument) was a well-grounded or firmly-backed claim.
There were six characteristics in Toulmin’s layout of argument. There are mainly three characteristics namely claim, ground, and warrant (Van Dijk 1997, Fairclough 2003). Toulmin (1969) further adds backing, rebuttal, and qualifier. Claim is conclusion whose merits we were seeking to establish (C) (Toulmin, 2003). Claim basically asked “What is the author trying to say?” for example Harry is a British subject. In case we were challenged, we had to make our claim justifiable, by appealing facts to support. Thus, these facts were upon which our claim was based. Data was the facts we appealed to ask as a foundation for the claim (D). Data could be evidence, proof, argument, or ‘What does the author say to persuade the audience of the claim?” foe instance Harry was born in Bermuda. Claim and data might not be enough to justify argument. If we were challenged further, we might not require adding more factual information but ‘How do we get there?’ In this case, we could present data by committing to a certain steps, to shop how we could justify this help. As this matter, we needed hypothetical statements, “acting as bridges and authoring the sort of step to which our particular argument commits us.” (Toulmin, 2003 p.91). Toulmin called proposition of this kind as warrant (W) to distinguish them from conclusion (C) and Data (D) for example A man born in Bermuda will generally be a British subject.
.
D so C
Since
W
Toulmin also added that data (D) were appealed to explicitly and warrant implicitly. Warrant showed general indicating the soundness of all arguments of the appropriate type. In this case, warrant answered “What’s causing the author to say the things s/he does? And how do we get there? Some warrants made us accept a claim unequivocally and qualify our conclusion with the advers ‘necessarily’. On the other hand, we may be challenged to make the step from data to conclusion by using conditions, exceptions, or qualifications. To overcome such problem, we might inquire some explicit reference to the degree of force by putting a modal qualifier (Q) because it is often necessary. Qualifier was like hedging e.g. many, many times, some or rarely, few, possibly, and so on. The example of qualifier is presumably. In addition, rebuttal could be given either through a continued dialogue or by pre-empting the counter by giving the rebuttal during the initial presentation of the argument. Rebuttal showed the counter argument or statement indicating circumstances when general argument does not seem true. Besides that, it also indicated circumstances in which the general authority of the warrant would have to be set aside for example Both his parents are Aliens / he has become a naturalized American. It now became more complex. Model qualifiers may (Q) and conditions of exception or rebuttal (R) were different from Data (D). Data and warrant were supposed to be put in separate places in layout. Besides, a last distinction proposed by Toulmin was backing the warrants. It was supposed to answer why in general this warrant should be accepted as justification. Backing of the warrants had precise relations to data, claim, warrants, and rebuttal for instance The following statutes and other legal provisions. Toulmin’s layout of arguments can be seen as follows.

D so, Q, C

Since
W Unless
R
On account of
B

Based on theories above, Toulmin’s theory was applicable to analyze arguments in debate speeches because in practice there were some arguments’ functions to be performed by different kinds of proposition. Toulmin argued (2003) the kinds of propositions did not stop on a premises and conclusion but among claims, data, warrant, modal qualifier, condition of rebuttals, statements about the applicability or inapplicability of warrants and other. Toulmin’s theory was also tested by some experts for instances Professor H. L. A. Hart and Sir David Rose. Both of them examined Toulmin’s theory of rebuttal in philosophy, jurisprudential study and the field of ethics. To analyze the flaws, the completeness of Toulmin’s layout of arguments is seen. If an argumentation does not give one or more characteristics of the layout, it is considered flaws because it has decreased the soundness of an argumentation. Therefore, this thesis used Toulmin’s theory because it was compatible with the aim of the research.
2.2 Related Studies
There were several articles based on Toulmin theory and argumentation which served as my related studies. Firstly, Cohen (1987) wrote an article entitled Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse. The paper described a model for the analysis of argumentation which included a theory of expected coherent structure which was used to limit analysis to the reconstruction of particular transmission forms, a theory of linguistics clues which assigned a functional interpretation to indicate the structure of the argument, a theory of evidence relationship including the pragmatic analysis to accommodate beliefs. Then, the implications of such particular design for dialogue analysis in general were the structure, linguistic constructions, and pragmatic analysis.
Next, it came from Enduran, Simon, and Osborne (2004) who wrote TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin’s argument Pattern for studying Science Discourse. It reported some methodological approached to the analysis of argumentation discourse in a projects titled ‘Enhancing the Quality of Argument in School Science. It showed the model development of instructional activities in an effort to make argumentation a component of instruction. The article started from a brief theoretical justification to show the argumentation was significance to science education. Then they contextualized the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern (TAP) in the study of argumentation discourse and provided a justification for the methodological outcomes. They presented two methodological approaches to the analysis of argumentation resulting in whole class as well as small group student discussion. Their finding was the use of TAP as an indicator of quality and quantity of argumentation in classroom discourse.
The paper presented by Gorski, Cyra, Jarzebowicz, and Miler (2008) represented and appraised Toulmin model arguments in trust cases. It allowed arguing various properties of its systems. They also introduced a method of argument appraised with the corresponding aggregation mechanism. Besides, Jamaludin, Ho, and Chen (2007) also wrote The Impact of Structured Argumentation and Enactive Role Play on Students’ Argumentative Writings Skills. Students there were taught the characteristics of argumentations based on Toulmin’s argumentation framework. Students participated in two separate modes of technology-facilitated learning in a cyclic, interwoven fashion, alternating back and forth between two cycles of argument and enaction. There were pre and post argumentation essays written based on Toulmin’s argument framework. The data were then contrasted and presented in the statistical results.

CHAPTER III: METHOD OF THE STUDY
High School Debate Competition (HSDC) was annually held by English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Airlangga University of Surabaya. Based on its history, it has evolved time after time, especially the number of participants. It was firstly participated by Surabaya and Sidoarjo debaters. These last two years, HSDC has been participated by other cities like Ponorogo, Malang, and other cities in East Java.
Since there were seven matches in debate tournament, the sample of this study was purposive that was the semifinal round. The approach for this research was qualitative. According to Wray, Trott, and Bloomer (1998), qualitative method showed the recognition of the importance of subjectivity of human beings. Debate was seen as a single context so that it needed interpreting and capturing its complexity. The samples taken were only four participants due to the difficulty in transcribing the data, the process of data collection, and limited time work on it, in the other words, it did not complete the requirement of quantitative approach that demanded validity and reliability. Furthermore, the nature of debate here was speaking while speaking itself was evanescent which disappears as soon as it was spoken (Cameron, 2001). That was why the speeches need recording, transcribing orthographically, and coding to ease the researcher in analyzing the data. Thus, by using qualitative approach, this proposal study was hoped feasible to research.
3.1 Sampling
. The sampling of this research was taken in semifinal round, SMAN 4 Malang versus SMA St. Albertus Malang. Sampling technique was purposive sampling (Wray et al. 1998, Given 2008). The sample was purposively chosen considering they were best speaker, one of the team was last year champion, and another team was clear enough in delivering their speech. It was very helpful for the researcher to transcribe the speeches. Besides that, it was matched with the characteristics of the sampling that was lying in selecting information rich-cases for in-depth analysis related to the central issues being studied.
The samplings were first and second speakers of each team debating under a motion. It was to standardize their capability. At least they have passed three preliminary rounds and octo-final rounds (4 matches). Ericson et al. (2003) argued that constructive speeches were delivered by first and second speaker of affirmative (Government) and first and second of negative (Opposition).
3.2 Technique of data collection
In this research, this observation used participatory observation because I was the adjudicator of this match. These were the steps that I took.
a. being the adjudicator of HSDC,
b. following the match- semifinal round,
c. recording the audio of this match,
d. transcribing the spoken data orthographically, and
e. coding data
To distinguish which speaker and arguments were analyzed, there were codes for instance T for Team, S for Speaker, and P for Point (statement). As an example T1 S1 P3 is for “Everybody loves junk food especially children”. The statement belonged to First Speaker of First Team (Government) in the 3rd point or statement.
3.2 Technique of Data Analysis
In this study, I used qualitative research method rather than quantitative. After the evanescent speeches were recorded, transcribed orthographically and coded, the following steps were below.
a. classifying and identifying the characteristics of arguments based on Toulmin’s model
Each characteristic had question to answer.
• Claim: what does the speaker try to prove?
• Data: what does the speaker say to persuade the audience of the claim?
• Warrant: how do we get there? Or what causes the speaker to say the thing s/he does?
• Qualifier: what is the degree of force to strengthen the claim?
• Backing: why in general should this warrant be accepted as justifiable?
• Rebuttal: what is the condition of exception?
If the answer was matched with an argument, then the argument belonged to certain characteristic. Besides that, to know the changing of argumentations, the topic or subtopic had to be distinguished by analyzing the environment of the speech. By recognizing sign postings, the changes were differentiated.
b. identifying the flaws of the argument based on the completeness Toulmin’s layout of arguments.
CHAPTER IV : ANALYSIS

4.1 Characteristics of Toulmin’s Layout of Argument
From the presentation of the transcription data of debate by the motion This House Will Ban Junk Food, each of speaker has used the characteristics of Toulmin’s layout of Argument even though not in all their arguments. Below is the result of the analysis on the characteristics of argumentation which are frequently used by high school debaters in delivering their arguments.

4.1.1 Claim
Claim is the conclusion, controlling idea or thesis, or the main point of argument. Here are examples of claim found in the speech.
• T1 S1 P 9: Junk food should be banned at especially school.
The first speaker of Government opens this debate by saying that now everyone especially children love junk food. She continued to show the fact that junk food is delicious and cheap. In this case she tries to say that those children do not realize the future implication of eating junk food. She also adds that junk food contain dangerous ingredients. Based on this problem, the Government want to ban junk food at school for the sake of students’ future. The argument above become the headline of the Government to propose this motion to the audience to consider. Therefore, it is called claim because she considers it as a major point in proposing a motion to audience. It is what she is trying to prove.
• T2 S1 P 68: As we the senior high students, we have ability to differentiate which is good and which is bad.

It is the turn for the Opposition to oppose the proposal given by the Government. The first speaker of the Opposition in this occasion rebuts the first speaker of the Government. He firstly assumes the statement given by the Government. The Government does not say whether in this debate the students are limited to elementary students or other children. Thus the Opposition assumes it to be the senior high school students. Since the Opposition assumes that the parameter is senior high school students, the Opposition then generalized his view that “We” (senior high school students) can differentiate good and bad. This statement also answers and challenges the first speaker of the Government about the nature that she states to give the insight about the children and reason why they should be taken care by the school. Therefore, the statement above is called claim because it is what the speaker asked the audience to accept or believe. It becomes the conclusion of the speaker’s statement about his concern to future even though he also consumes junk food.

Claim is one of the main characteristics in Toulmin’s layout of arguments. The students here frequently use it to state what they want to prove either to propose or to oppose.
4.1.2 Data
Data are reasons given to support the claim in order that the audience can see the evidence or proof of the given claim. Here are the examples of data found in the speech.
• T1 S2 P109-110: Please remember that this is snack but the impact is poisonous case, even Ladies and Gentlemen if you eat just a small thing, but it can lead you to face cancer and later on.

It is the second rebuttal given by the second speaker of Government. After attacking the Opposition on food standardization, he rebuts the data given by the Opposition. It was about the personal experience of the Opposition speaker that was concerned with the speaker’s concern to future and his cilok consumption. The Government speaker tries to tackle the data by saying that junk food is still poisonous. He tries to describe what the audience can have later because of junk food. He in this case uses cause and effect to give data for his rebuttal. The statement above is called data because the speaker wants to convince his claim that junk food is very dangerous. They are called data because the speaker uses them to rebut the Opposition’s argument about consuming cilok.
• T2 S2 P174: We know that outside there are still many junk food if students wants to buy.

What has been done by the Opposition is to show that the Government’s proposal is not significant to be granted. One of the efforts done by the Opposition is to oppose the Government who want no more junk food for many reasons. The Opposition has convinced that junk food is not dangerous and he tries to prove that the proposal is not significant because it can lead to other problem for instance economic condition of the sellers and the demand in the society (students). He adds the reasons that outside there are junk food available for students. He tries to use the statement above as data to prove his claim that it can not make significant effect to consume the junk food.

Data is also one of the main of characteristics in Toulmin’s layout of arguments because it provides support for the claim. If a speaker only states claim without any data, it may be considered as assumption because the claim has no ground to support and the question will be how that speaker comes to such claim if there is no data. Based on the analysis above, these data are mostly about proof to make audience believe because they seldom use evidence such as facts or experts’ opinion. In the other words, the speakers take for granted what their knowledge and generalize them to be data for their claim.

4.1.3 Warrant
Warrant is assumption or presupposition underlying the argument. It is usually in the form of general beliefs understood by the speaker and the audience. Here are the examples of warrant found in the speech.
• T1 S1 P20: Students don’t know which one is healthy and or not.
The first speaker of Government would like to explain the nature of students so that they want to ban junk food at school. She believes that students buy junk food most of the times because junk food is delicious even cheap. She makes audience believe that students only matter with the delicate and cheapness of jubk food. Thus the statement above is called warrant because it serves the logical link of “the nature of the students who do not know which oen is healthy and or not”.
• T2 S1 P80: Of course it is dangerous because we eat it all the times as the main menu, but actually they forget that cilok is snack.

After proving that junk food is delicious and ahs high demand in the society, the Opposition tries to answer the Government’s rebuttal that junk food is not dangerous. He Opposition believes that it is dangerous because it is not all the times just like main menu. He tries to distinguish snack and main menu. He also makes believe that junk food is just a snack. It is called warrant because it logically becomes the logical link to show that “junk food is dangerous especially if consumed as main menu”.
Warrant is one of the main characters as well. Its functions as the logical link for data and claim. Many of the argumentations use warrant, but for some argumentations are without warrant.

4.1.4 Backing
Backing is the further back-up of the argumentation. Here is the example of backing found in the speech.
• T1 S2 P107: That is why this is false standardized.
The second speaker has to support the previous speaker of his team and opposes the Opposition. Before he delivers his arguments to support, he attacks the speaker of the Opposition. Before that, the Opposition says that junk food has passed standardization. To Government, this is actually wrong standardization because kios-kios (sellers) selling macaroni and cilok do not have acknowledgement to pass standardization. He says that it happens because they also have to pay so that they jus sell it at kios2kios and schools, not in the big higher markets.
It is called backing because it further supports the warrant “That’s why there is also standardization at all because this is only sold at kios-kios and this is only sold at school, not in the big higher” and claim “This is actually wrong the standardization”.

• T2 S2 P176: Junk food can’t be banned to the school because they still can buy it outside the school.

This point is to show how that banning junk food is insignificant. It opposes the proposal of the Government. Whenever the Government says that the jun food is harmful and should be banned at school, the Opposition simply negates by saying that it is useless because outside there are junk food sellers and students can but. The statement above is called backing because it becomes the further back up to a claim” It can not make significant effect to consume the junk food’ and warrant “So based on my explanation, it can make conclusion that if we ban junk food in the school, it cannot give significance and moreover bring bad impact especially junk food seller and towards the students because cannot give snack”.
Backing is one of the he six characteristics of arguments. It actually gives the further back up to all characteristics of arguments. If warrant indicates logical link for data and the claim, backing indicates the logical links among other characteristics of Toumin’s layout of arguments. Many of their argumentations use backing to strengthen their argumentations.

4.1.5 Qualifier
Qualifier is the hedging given in the argument. Here is the example of qualifier found in the speech.
• T1 S1 P53: And if we combine with the nature of junk food which will lead to bad things , into dangerous healthy thing.

In her previous statement she explains the poisonous harmful junk food band why banning junk fod. She tries to refer to the nature of education and relates it to schools’ obligation to take care of students including their food at schools. She argues that students do not know what they will eat. To qualifies her claim, she refers to the nature of junk f ood to show the conditional possibility. The qualifier qualifies the claim “we equal to bad thing, to harmful thing especially for students (……) take care by school”.

• T1 S2 P118: When it is hungry.
The Government still believes that the motion stands still. The Government would like to bring the motion philosophically from the nature of schools, students, and junk food. A claim is given by the Opposition that junk food is only a snack not a main menu for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. It is needed to lose hunger. Then the Government comes up by saying that it can not fulfill the hungriness. The qualifier of the claim is the statement above. It is called qualifier because it qualifies the claim “it cannot fulfill the hungriness”.

• T2 S2 P166: If it’s banned at school.
The Opposition believes that the motion fails. The second speaker of the Government tells about the standardization. According to Opposition, it is only assumption especially junk food (macaroni) can cause cancer. The Opposition this time rebuts the Government that they can not give significance why cilok should be banned at schools. The Opposition gives the data that there are many junk food sellers outside. Therefore, it is insignificant. The statement above become the condition for the claim so that we know that the banning is useless if it is done at schools.
Qualifier is one of six characteristics proposed by Toulmin to strengthen the argumentation. Some of students’ argumentations use qualifier in supporting their claim. Most of them are in the forms of if-condition. The weakness is then how they use the condition for instance “if in home their parents still providing them with healthy food, of course there is kind of balance of nutrition”. They only stop to that statement. It is better to put a sentence as data “their parents provide them with healthy food.” Such statement can make the qualifier as the standard that has been achieved by the speaker to prove the claim. Thus, their if-condition can strengthen their claim rather than weaken their claim.


4.1.6 Rebuttal
Rebuttal is the counter argument or statement indicating circumstances when general argument does not seem true. Here is the example of rebuttal found in the speech.
• T1 S1 P16: While the negative side of the House should explain to you and prove here that junk food is okay, nice, and not dangerous for them in the future.

After defining the motion and telling why they want to propose the motion, the first speaker of Government gives rebuttal the Opposition in order to be answered in the next speaker. Since the Government proposes the motion, the Opposition has to oppose the motion. Thus the statement above is called rebuttal because it is directed to their opposition to prove since the Government team believes that this is dangerous.
• T2 S1 P82: Meanwhile, include the parents still provide their children the health food, Ladies and Gentlemen. Let me remind you that junk food is not dangerous.
The Government always attacks the Opposotion that junk food is dangerous. On the other hand, the Opposition believes that junk food is not consumed as main menu and it is not dangerous. He also believes that people do not consume it all the times. To answer the conflicting view point in the Government and audience, he gives such rebuttal above. It is to satisfy the curiousity in the eaudience’s mind.
Besides that, it answers the question of the previous speaker from the Government when she was saying “Junk food is dangerous”.
Rebuttal is one of six characteristics supporting the soundness of arguments. Many of their argumentation use rebuttal either to answer or to question the claims of opponents. Rebuttal can be in the form of claim, data, warrant or other characteristics. In their speeches, they are mostly in the form of claim. So when the focus of speakers is on giving rebuttal, the claim is omitted because the claim is in the form of rebuttal.
Based on the analysis above, it shows that high school debaters also have been able to use the characteristics as in Toumin’s layout of arguments. To my own finding, some of their arguments are floating so that they cause confusion when they need classifying.



4.1.7 Signposting Resulted in a Claim
Signposting resulted to be a claim means that the statement is actually a signposting to indicate the new topic to introduce but it results to be so-what claim to the argumentation. The example can be seen below.
T1 S1 P19: Now I will explain first philosophically, the nature of the students.
The aim of the speaker is to show the nature of the students. Unfortunately, the statement stops and there is no further information to what the nature of students is related. The next sentence also can not be stated as claim too because it actually elaborates the first statement. Besides, that next statement functions as the warrant for the floating statement and data. Further, the environment of the statement also shows that they refer to the nature of the students as steted above. Thus, the statement above is called signposting resulted to be a claim.
4.1.8 Rebuttal Resembling a Claim
In the argumentations, a claim is absent and rebuttal is present instead. Identified further, it is only a rebuttal that comes as a claim to be justified to oppose the opponent. It causes confusion because the function is to tackle, not to provide an argumentation. It often comes at the beginning of the presentation of debaters to refute their opponent. Some examples can be seen below.
T1 S2 P112 Rebuttal: The first speaker of the negative side of the House is actually hypocrite.
The speaker uses the argument to attack the Opposition. He tries to show the audience the fallacy made by the Opposition. Data, warrant and backing are given to show that the first speaker is hypocrite. The sense is also different from the rebuttal at which a claim usually exists.
T2 S2 P 154 Rebuttal: The negative side of this House does not support this motion because this junk food is not main menu in our daily.

The environment of the statement above is data and warrant which support the rebuttal. It is used as rebuttal because it shows the conflicting viewpoint that is asked by the Government. The function is to answer the question asked by the Government whether junk food is not dangerous. Basically there is no claim found in the argumentation and it is actually used as a mean to attack the Government’s general argumentations. At the end it is still rebuttal resembling a claim.

4.1.9 Claim Repetition within an Argumentation
It shows the repetition within a package of argumentation. An example can be seen below.
T2 S2 P 174: It can not make significant effect to consume the junk food.
T2 S2 P177: It cannot give significant impact towards students

The argument above appears twice but in slight difference of diction. It may be aimed at reemphasizing of the whole Opposition cases because it is stated before the speech ends. Unfortunately, there are two statements that refer to a single claim, namely T2 S2 P174 and T2 S2 P177. So, here we see in an argumentation, claim is stated twice with slight difference. If T2 S2 P177 is categorized as a separate argumentation, it is going to be redundant because in fact it refers to the same thing as the previous argumentation. Therefore, it still belongs to an argumentation but it is called a claim repetition.
4.2 Flaws on the Argumentations Made by the Speakers
Toulmin has argued that there are mainly six characteristics namely claim, data, warrant, qualifier, backing, and rebuttal to make sound argumentation. To analyze the flaws, therefore, the completeness of Toulmin’s characteristics are examined. It is also to see the logics concerned with soundness of the claim, the solidity of the grounds, and the firmness of the backing.
The example of flaws in argumentation can be seen as follows.
T1 S1
P (14) Rebuttal: we as the government side of the House should prove to you all that junk food is not healthy at all even junk food is dangerous.
P (15) Claim: Therefore we want to ban it.
P (16) Rebuttal: While the negative side of the House should explain to you and prove here that junk food is okay, nice, and not dangerous for them in the future.

The statements above are stated after the speaker gives little explanation to the audience about junk food. She then gives rebuttal to the Opposition that they will prove that junk food is dangerous and the Opposition should prove that junk food is not dangerous. The claim for those rebuttals is that they want to ban junk food. The weakness of the argumentation above is due to the absence of data, warrant, qualifier, and backing. If the speaker states the argument followed by other four characteristics, her argumentation may be tangible to deter her opponent.

• T2 S1
P (62) Rebuttal: The government side of the House believes this motion that junk food is dangerous to be consumed while the negative side of the House believe that junk food is not dangerous.
P (62) Data: Junk food had fact that since there is the Government’s explanation of food which Indonesian know as especially today BPOM.

Before the speaker gives his main case, he rebuts some point of the Government. He states that junk food is not dangerous and there is also BPOM. The weakness of the argumentation is that there are no warrant, backing, and qualifier. Besides that, he does not elaborate the function of BPOM. He may assume that the audiences know what BPOM is. But, it will be better if he explain what BPOM is and what it does so that his data can be strong enough to attack the Government.

T2 S1
P (71) Rebuttal: So moreover outside the school there is so much cilok sellers and other junk food.
P (71) Claim: so the government’s fact is not significant.

Still giving rebuttal to the Government, the Opposition in this case speaks generally. He only refers to general thing without giving any details which points he tries to rebut. In giving rebuttal, the speaker should rebuts certain point and provide reasoning to his rebuttal in order that he can really attack the argument of the opponent. The flaws of the argumentation above lie on the absence of warrant, backing, and qualifier because the rebuttal above is claim rebuttal.
Based on the flaws above and overall speeches identified, argumentations made by speakers are separated or not well-arranged. They still can not tie their arguments into some solid argumentations. As the result, there are many repetitions in their argumentations and some flaws appear. They may need to make good sign postings too from a topic to others.

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION

High School Debate Competition is annually held by English Department of Airlangga University of Surabaya. Many senior high schools join this competition. In accordance to enrich the study on argumentation discourse, the researcher studies the use of argumentation in high school debaters. This study purposes its analysis on the semifinal match, exactly on four speakers of the two teams debating.
In high school debate competition, it is found that debaters frequently use the characteristics proposed in Toulmin’s layout of argument like claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal though not all of their argumentations use the six characteristics. The findings show that they have frequently made arguments as proposed by Toulmin’s theory. Many of their argumentations fulfill the characteristics of layout of arguments. In addition, some argumentations have failed to complete the layout of arguments and they are considered flaws due to the incompleteness. The incompleteness makes argumentation less sound. Flaws art their argumentations are mostly about adding warrant, backing and qualifier. Besides, there are also some floating in the layout of argumentations for instance signposting resulted in a claim. A claim is a conclusion of data, warrant and other characteristics. While in this case, the statement is actually a sign posting of a new topic. Other statements assert the signposting statement as if it is a claim to assert. Thus, it results in a claim for the rest of arguments. Other is rebuttal resembling a claim. The function of a statement is to rebut while assertion for the statement make it as a claim. The last floating is a claim repetition within an argumentation. Some of floating arguments occur because students’ argumentations are sometimes not well arranged so that there are many repetitions thus making argumentations not tight and separated.
Toulmin’s layout of arguments helps to structure the argumentation. It is hoped that by reading this thesis, readers as well as teachers and coaches can have insight to prepare their students to learn how to debate especially in making argumentation. They can encourage their students to join debate competition. For students, they can know what skills they need to understand to join debate especially recognize the elements to make sound argumentations. Further, may this study give more insight to argumentative discourse.


REFERENCES
Bassam, Greg., Irwin, William., Nardone, Henry., Wallaca, James M. (2002). Critical Thinking: A Student Introduction. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Cameron, Deborah. (2001). Working with Spoken Discourse . London : Sage.
Cohen, Robin. (1987). ‘Analyzing the Structure of Argumentation Discourse’, Journal of the Association of Computational Linguistics, Volume 13, Number 1-2, January-June. pp. 11-24.
Crusius, Timothy W., and Channel, Carolyn E. (2003). The Aims of Arguments: A Text and Reader, 4th ed. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Enduran, Sibel., Simon, Shirley., and Osborne, Jonathan. (2004). TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin’s argument Pattern for studying Science Discourse. London: Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Retrieved May 22, 2010, from http://interscience.wiley.com
Ericson, Jon M., Murphy, James J., and Zeuschner, Raymond Bud. (2003). The Debater’s Guide. 3rd Edition. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Faiclough, Norman. (2003). Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
Gorski, Janusz., Cyra, Lukasz., Jarzebowicz, Aleksander., and Miler, Jakub. (2008). ‘Representing and Appraising Toulmin Model Arguments on Trust Cases’, Journal of the Proceeding of 8th Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument. Patras: Gdansk University Press.
Hornby, AS. (2005). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 7th Edition. NY: Oxford University Press.
Jamaludin, Azilawati., Ho Mei Lin Caroline, and Chee Yam Sam. (2007). ‘The Impact of Structured Argumentation and Enactive Role Play on Students’ Argumentative Writing Skills’, Journal of the Proceeding Asvilite Singapore 2007. Nanyang Walk: Nanyang Technology University Press. pp. 430-439.
Paltridge, Brian. (2000). Making Sense of Discourse. Queensland: Gold Cost.
Palys, Ted. (2008). Purposive Sampling. In Lisa M. Given (Ed.). The Sage: Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods Volume 1 & 2. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Rottenberg, Annette T. (1988). Elements of Argument: a Text and Reader. 2nd Edition. NY: St. Martin’s Press Inc.
Syverson, Margaret A. (1998). ‘Pattern and Process of Resoning in Virtual Worlds’, in Christopher Launder and Kirstie Bellman (ed.), Journal of the Proceeding of the Virtual Worlds and Simulation Conference. San Diego: Society for Computer Simulation International. pp. 107-112.
Toulmin, Stephen. (1969). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved March 4, 2010, from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm
Van Eemeren, Frans H., Grootendoorst, Rob., Jacksons, Sally., and Jacobs, Scott. (1997). ‘Argumentation’ in Teun Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Structures and Process: Discourse Studies a Multidisciplinary Inroduction, V0l. 1. London: Sage.
Wray, Alison., Trott, Kate., and Bloomer, Aileen. (1998). Projects in Linguistics. London: Arnold.
Weston, Anthony. (1992). A Rulebook for Arguments. 2nd Edition. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Woods, Nancy. (2004). Perspective on Argument. 4th ed. NJ: Prentice Hall.

TEFL Report

Eva Nur Mazidah
120710209
Teaching English as a Foreign Language


English Teaching Practice in Assa’adah Senior High School Bungah Gresik
Held on December 1, 2010

1. Introduction

In Indonesia English becomes as a foreign language. Since we live in the globalization era and the future generation also need to have skills a\especially on the global language used by millions people in he world, English at school is one of compulsory subject for students, especially senior and junior high school students. English is also examined as their final sate examination. Therefore, students must learn English because English is urgently needed for many reasons.
In accordance to Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) subject that I am taking this semester, in my teaching practice, I selected Assa’adah Senior High School in Bungah, Gresik. Since on the school were going to have final examination, I only had time to teach for a day in four different class namely they are XII IPA 2, XII IPA 1, XI IB, and X 1. Before I taught, I had consulted to teachers who teach those classes about the material and the condition of the students including their English level. The number of the students on a class is about 35 students. In short, the class is quiet big to handle. One thing they wanted me to do was to encourage them to study English.
The aim of this teaching is to practice theories that I have learnt during my study in TEFL lecture. I tried to combine theories with the real condition of the students. In some ways, they were very difficult to handle. Many factors influence such condition, one of the reasons is because the language level they have is not good. For them English is still a difficult boring lesson. They claim so because they did not like English many of them found difficulties in understanding English for instance comprehension, pronunciation, and other factors. I hoped that by giving a new insight of how fun English is with different teacher, they were attracted to what I programmed.
In this report, I am going to explain what I did during my teaching practice in Assa’adah Senior High School in Bungah. I divided my explanation per class including materials, condition of class, and class activities.

2. Teaching Practice
Teaching Practice in XII IPA 2
The class started at 6. 40. I taught XII IPA 2. The students in this class are 38 students. This class is homogenous, all female students. I and an English teacher of this class had to wait for the class being cleaned by students for 5 minutes before I had to teach them. Afterward, since I was new for them, after greeting, I was introduced by the teacher, Bu Shofi, to the class and I continued to introduced my self and my intention to teach their class. I told them what we were going to do for next 80 minutes. It was about practicing ‘admitting’ and ‘accusing’. Before I continued to the lesson, I checked their presence first because it was a must in every lesson, while Bu Shofi sat in the back row of the class watching the class activities.
The lesson began. I invited them to recall their memory when they were being accused or accusing and admitting for their mistakes. Some of students responded my instruction. Since their English level is not good, they responded my instruction in Bahasa though I told them in English. At least I knew that they understand what I said in English but they were not eager to speak in English. Then I asked one of them to tell her experience about the topic. I asked her to code switch if she could not make in English. Afterward, I commanded them to open their book on certain page regarding the lesson for that day. There were a passage and I asked some students randomly to read the passage in turn. They made many mispronunciations. After the passage was read, I corrected the misspelling and asked the students to repeat after me. I hoped that they can remember the mistakes and know the correct ones. Then, I asked them to find the difficult words that they did not know the meaning. Some students asked me while some others were crowded. I had to ask them to keep silent for several times because there was no Bu Shofi in the class (she left me alone in the class for some times to let me handle the class). Then, I explain the use of admitting and accusing and also the structure to make such sentences. Afterward, I group them, four students and for two groups they had 5 students in a group. For 5 minutes I asked them to make a sentence of admitting and a sentence of accusing made in a dialogue. I went around the class in case they still got difficulties. Many of them were about the grammar, the use of tenses and conjugation. I directly corrected them. Afterward, I asked some representative of the group to read their sentences and I give comment. In this class, I mixed English and Indonesian so that they know what I mean. Then, I also explained them, only as additional, the tenses that they were confused and the conjugation. It was about simple present and present continuous. 15 minutes left, I recalled again the difficult words they find and re-emphasized the lesson. Then, I asked them to make some sentences again individually in a piece of paper and gave them several conditions. I asked them to choose one of them. The conditions were presumably experienced by them in everyday life for instance being accused of stealing money, stealing boyfriend, admitting mistakes, and other problems. Some of them grumbled because I asked them to do the assignment and some of them looked enthusiastic. After all, I had to say most of them could follow what I asked but the class was also crowded so that that I had to walk around the class to make them order. Though there was Bu Shofi but they sometimes annoyed me. Further, the result of the individual assignment showed that they actually knew the use of accusing and admitting but the problems lay on the sentence structure, tenses, and conjugation.
Teaching Practice in XI IB (Bahasa)
The class takes 80 minutes. The number of students is 35 students with heterogonous students, male and female. Their English level is not good and their motivation is too low. The language that I use is mostly Indonesian. The lesson is about genre texts. The teacher, Pak Syafi’, stated that the lesson had done. So mostly I only reviewed and practices with LKS. At first Pak Syafi’ did not accompany me. So I handled the class by my self for 20 minutes before he came to the class. I told them the outline and they requested to play a game before the time was up. They told me about their confusion with genre texts then I explained them and draw the generic structure of each genre to summarize the lesson. Then I checked them orally the difference between as genre to others. I thought that they mostly understood. Then I commanded them to work on the worksheet of LKS in pair, with their tablemates for 20 minutes while I checked their presence. Then I walked around the class in case they had troubles. I encourage them to be active in asking if they did not understand or found difficulties. I tried ti make them feel comfort with me. Then I and the class checked their answers together. I also asked some of them to read the questions, asked difficult words. They I told them the right ones and wrote on their vocabularies-bank board. I also corrected their mispronunciations and some grammatical errors in speaking and asked them to repeat after me in order to make them remember the mistakes. 20 minutes before the class was over, I played a game with them, I call it Words in the Jungle. I gave them a piece of paper each group. They have to find words either in horizontal or vertical lines. It was all in alphabets. The contain is about the generic structure of genre texts. After finding the words, they have to classify to which generic structure the words belong. It was done in a group of four students. Then I asked them to make an example of a title of each genre text. Then I asked a volunteer and two students to presents their answers.

Teaching Practice in XII IPA 1
The class is conducive with 38 students and their English level is good enough. They were all female students. The lesson is the same as XII IPA 2, accusing and admitting. I mix English and Indonesia but I tended to use English rather than Indonesia. After being introduced by Bu Shofi, I told them the outline of today’s lesson. I asked if they know about the topic and one of the students voluntarily expressed her opinion. It was so helpful so that I could directly give an example. Afterward, I asked them in a pair to make a dialogue containing admitting and accusing. I let them to freely select a topic they liked. Checking in case they found difficulties, I found many of them had known about tenses and grammar only some of them still got confused with conjugations. So I did not need to explain in front of the class. Then I randomly asked some students to present their dialogue while other handing in their answers. One of students then asked me how to learn English. I just asked what they liked for instance song lyrics to learn pronunciation, vocabularies and other aspects of English grammar. They were enthusiastic to follow. Then, suddenly, a teacher came to tell that one of the students had to join English speech contest then Bu Shofi asked me how to develop the topic for speech. I just invited them to brainstorm. I had to say that most of hem enjoyed the class.
Teaching Practice in X-1
There were 32 students in the class. Their English level was good. They were active and a bit crowded. It is the 80 minutes before they went home so they looked tired. Since Bu Shofi said that their lesson was done, so I was asked to check their homework about procedure text and give them grammar test in LKS. After introducing me and checking their presence, I asked them what procedure text was and asked a volunteer and some students randomly to present the homework and others submitted their work to Bu Shofi who sat at the back row. Then I asked them to work individually on a grammar tests for 15 minutes in a piece of paper. Then, we checked their answers after distributing the papers to whole class. I asked some students to read the answers and corrected them if any mistakes. At least more than twenty students get more that 75. then I let them asked questions about their difficulties then explained them in fron of the class. Some of them wanted to have a game then I invited them to play ‘making a sentence’. It was done in a group of four students. I told them to fold the paper after they wrote what I instructed. I instructed them to make a subject, fold the paper, make a verb, and fold a paper, and so on until they created a sentence. They were curious with what I asked them to do. Then, we open the folded paper and I asked 5 students to read their sentences. Indeed the conjugations are wrong because they did not know the whole sentence. Many students laughed because sentences were non-sense. Then, I asked them to reconstruct the sentence and find the words they do not understand the meaning. Some students used unfamiliar words that I had to check in my dictionary. Then we pronounced some words together because some students mispronounced the words. Then the class was over. I have to say that the class was quiet fun though some students were sometimes crowded and I had to ask them to order.
3. Conclusion
Teaching English is not as easy as I thought. I had to understand the condition of the class not only their English level, but also their interest in English in order to make me easy in giving program for them. Bu Shofi and Pak Syafi’s also asked me to encourage them so I have to really open and aware to the problem they faced. I also gave them games because I knew that games were seldom given by their teacher, at least they did not get bored with the lesson I gave. For their English, I saw that many of them still got confused with grammars, pronunciation, and vocabularies. So, I tried to re-explain some points that they were confused. I hope they learnt something with me.

sociolinguisticsstics

sticsEva Nur Mazidah
120710209
Sociolinguistics
Final Examination

English and Internet in the Eyes of Global Society

In the globalization era, it seems like technology has becomes part of life and one of its kind is internet. Many people use internet from children to adults. Internet indeed gives many impacts to our life. Not only access of information, but also power, ideology, capitalism, and cultures are spread through internet. It becomes a new sort of world for humans in which virtual space has to be seen as an expression of the real, not only its interests (Silverstone, 1999).
This paper would give a description how language is used in the internet, how universal this Global English is how English in internet gives impacts to indigenous communication language, what Global English communication is, what English convention is used in internet, how English broadcasts dominant cultures, and how language diversity means.
Talking about internet, we need to know how it becomes so popular. It is now internet found everywhere. Let’s say internet is like a mushroom in a wet season, as time goes on, as technology grows more sophisticated time after time. All countries in this world have already got the access of internet network.
Internet, of course, is a like two sides of a coin. It brings good and harm at the same times. It gives very good millions access of information; it eases short-long communication, etc. in another side, it also brings caveats. It potentially creates loss e.g. cyber-crime, cyber-war, etc. After all, sometimes we see that the appearance of internet cause problematic issues.
One of problems caused by internet is the language use. We see that language functions as a mean to communicate each other. We also realize that this world becomes closer in term of a fact that we need other people, even from other countries. Therefore, we need a media, not only physical one, but also non-physical one. Internet as physical mean functions to medium and language is the soul of the medium which connects and communicates our aims. The problem is that language itself is not that innocent.
There is a hidden agenda within media and language (Silverstone 1999). It is actually simple but it still does not meet our satisfaction. Let’s say press media, TV, and internet well as, basically move under certain agenda. They try to intervene people’s life. Internet is not that innocent at this prejudice. It gives potentially influences socially, politically, economically, and culturally. Media has a power to run this agenda by using a slithering tool so-called language and the language is English.
An article ‘Why a Global Language? English is a Global Language’ opens up our eyes that in fact “English rules” this world. It has become a lingua franca for people on earth. Therefore its universality is always spread time after time. As a consequence, English is admitted to be the symbol of a globalization, diversification, progress, identity and power. Everywhere we go to countries, we can find English whether it becomes the first, second or foreign language. It implicitly shows its huge “power” over the countries physically and mentally.
As I noticed, many sites use English as language and some combine English and national language (bilingual texts). It happens because they believe that English is needed as a bridge communicating people around the world. Almost 85% of websites in internet are served in English (Kramarae, n.d.). People realize that English is an international language therefore it is hoped that people from other parts of world can exchange information from other sources. As an example, we can see website of universities in Indonesia. Many of them provide bilingual texts so that people from other countries can access the information.
Millions sources use English, indeed. If the question asks whether English can serve adequately as the basic language of internet, the answer is approximately 97% ‘Yes’ it can. I find a bit doubt because though English is a lingua franca, it does not mean that all people use English. We may still find everywhere people who know not about English. They in fact use their national language when they open web-pages. Internet has been provided with national language in their version. But if they want to get more global access, they do need English. When you enter such keywords in English, you will find such different result comparing when you enter the keywords in Indonesia, for instance. Indonesian information is not as abundant as English version. There is unfortunately a potential different and it shows that since the first origin of internet is in English form, the basic language of internet is actually English.
Why websites mostly use English is because they would like to serve majority of people and virtual space has to be seen as an expression of the real world (Silverstone, 1999). In the real world we can find about around 495.8 millions people speaking English (Internet World Stats, 2009). It is evidence that a lot of people use English as their communication language either as L1, L2, foreign language, or favored language. There is an old poet saying that “Japanese lives in Japan; German lives in Germany; Turkish lives in Turkey…. English lives at home.” It indicates that English is recognized by many people in many countries all over the world. We do not need to worry not being able to communicate with people in foreign countries. If you can speak English, you survive. English becomes a bridge to global communication. In virtual world, the same notion happens. Web pages are commonly written in English. It is to ease other people see other parts of the world view. The undercover agenda is that you are part of global community if you can master the global community language—English.
People may wonder when English is used globally, people, whose countries are not English speaking country, are stimulated to study English for example Indonesia. English here is as a foreign language. Nowadays, we find English courses from formal ones to private ones. People are willing to study English. They need that for education, job, etc. while Indonesian is a bit left. There is a language competition here. When it happens, the worst is language extinction. Actually it will not happen if there are number of people speaking the certain language they use (especially local language). It is all in people’s hands whether they still use their local language or not. Therefore some people believe that English jeopardizes indigenous language communication.
Now, let see the context how English can jeopardize indigenous language. Based on the setting, which is in internet, the question is whether or not the development of English on the internet destructively can replace indigenous communication. To my opinion, it will not destructively replace indigenous communication. I can not say certain because internet is not a real world. We have to see also the intensity of people using internet. It is not going to be as harmful as when English is obliged to be L2 or foreign language. Either as L2 or foreign language, English is not going to be success to destroy the indigenous language if people still use their own language. Furthermore, language use in internet is mostly in written. We have to see the potential different between reading comprehension in reading and speaking ability of people who are not from English-speaking countries. They may understand the text but can not speak fluently. Therefore there is no guarantee that it will destructively replace indigenous communication language. A preventing action for it is by still using the indigenous language.
Language is actually the identity of the speaker, for instance Javanese belongs to Javanese, etc. That is still the standard but not as strong as it used to be. In some stances, one person can speak several distinct languages and it is possible to imitate accent. So, it is not going to be the only standard.
In answering the question ‘what is the community of the Global English?’, the answer is the Global English community with various varieties. We can not deny that English does not belong to only United Kingdom, United States, Australia, etc. Further e.g. Singapore, India, Malaysia, etc. also become the member of vast varieties of English. They all speak English but the influences of their own language also exist. It is impossible that they will all follow British English or American English, etc. They will somehow still use their uniqueness in their language as a sign that they also part of other cultures for instance Singapore, we know term ‘Singaporean English’ that has some influence from Chinese.
The phenomenon is similar to Javanese language. People speak Javanese, but they use various varieties in Java. People from certain region potentially use different varieties from others. The influences may come from different local habit, accent, vocabularies, pronunciation, cultures, etc. Still, they still can understand each other language because they stand on the same language. That is why Malang people, Sidoarjo people, Salatiga people, Tulungagung people, Surabaya people, and so on are still called Javanese.
So, English here functions as a system of signs that bind all people in the world together. They all stand under the universal language, English. Therefore they are called as the community of Global English because they communicate with English whatever their varieties are.
Since there are various varieties in English, we can still find some pattern in convention they make. As I notice my self, most of English convention used is American English. We do not need to question it because United States has a huge power in governing media. It is also supported by a fact that in a real world, United Influences also dominates our world for instance lifestyle, movie, state policies, foreign policies, economics, cultures, and so on. United States become the ruler of this world implicitly. Everything in media talks about United States. New invention blows up because of United States. They can govern media and advertise everything. The power over countries that finally make United States become the role model of everything. Since naturally they are dominating, of course their language becomes one of their parts. Language can be politically functioned as Habermas said.
The review above does not mean that American English really dominating so that we could not find the British one, for instance. We still can find whatever the style we want. But after all, American English is dominating. If we talk about article, many of them are in American English. They still follow the academic rules. If you see advertisement in internet, many of them use American style too. It is because United States also dominate global market.
United States, in this case, seems to have splashed their fragrance to all aspects in this world. It is all because of media, as I stated before. It becomes tool to co-orchestrate what happens in this world. They give information like CNN, interpretation, education, entertainment via Hollywood movies, etc. Media, in this case, become a bridge and mirror for us to see the reality out there. If certain party can govern the media, they are the god of this world in hegemonizing people to be in their side. Who is that? United States is in the first rank.
Now let me show you how the media, including internet, can shape the social mindset. Media are now seen as social institution or domains. They deal with content, recipient (process of communications) and how they are communicated each other. We will see that there is media discourse working in that process. It is believed that media are anyway controversial in term of reflecting ‘reality’ or just ‘co-orchestrate’ the reality. To this fact, some argues that somehow media discourse still give a degree of mediation in providing content. Towards the production of messages, they are also controlled by factors through a hierarchy of levels and responsibilities. In the other hand, recipients are dilemmatic with media restriction in access and participation has created much controversy whereas media has designed messages for audience. In conclusion, media can be regarded as a specific communicative structure providing content (public idiom) and media discourse proceeds content into media messages to whom the message is addressed.
The details of media discourse refer to forms, structures, language use and semiotic codes in media, and so on. Media discourse in certain ways needs differentiating from the messages they transfer e.g. programs. Therefore, there are three dimensions of messages and media discourse. First dimension is the production point of view, low level out-put to which recipients are exposed their reaction, for instance an interview with President Nelson Mandela (the interface of two dimensions). Secondly, processing of content occurs at several layers of an institutional hierarchy. Low-level output is the form of the program format e.g. news, spots reports, etc. which can be grouped into categories in terms of orientation. The low-level of messages are shaped in spatiotemporal sequences. Third dimension shows how it is transmitted as media messages. At the end of the day, language which is the central carrier of low-level messages and of messages sequences plays an important role in shaping belief system to come to dominate. The explanation above gives a sight that media are physically informative and mentally affective.
Basically within the language itself, we have already spread so-called culture, a pack of culture. Another view again shows how combination of media and language broadcast cultures. I mentioned about Hollywood movie industries. Almost good films are from there. If we think critically, many values are given and they succeed to make us believe that they are the real example of this world. All movies have a tendency to show that United States is a superpower, a wise state, a winner of everything. They try to influence us and captivate us through their movies. We may not realize that this is the way they echo their agenda. They would like to use English and media to Americanize this world and invite us to their way of life.
We need to make prejudice that it actually threatens other cultures. If previously I said that it is not going to jeopardize the language, it is still justifiable. But in the name of culture that is not in the form of language, I say that it really threatens.
There are several reasons why it is so threatening. Let’s take a look at Indonesian culture. We have high values in family matters, friendship, togetherness, respect, etc, ; we are told to have politeness in clothing, behaving, etc. Now, movies, free access of internet to browse whatever you like, has told us new culture so-called permissive. Media e.g. social networking sites tell you how to be individualist. Freedom of expression becomes a new ideology and faith for other as Americans believe. Clothing, you can wear whatever you like and whatsoever with other people think about you. They would like to close our eyes by making our self busy with our individual matters. These values unfortunately tell us what we should be. We still can prevent endangered indigenous language, but we are highly difficult to remind and prevent others when these values become ideology of people in majority. The way it spreads is easy by inserting values in language in movies broadcasted by media. It is then believed as a dominant culture values.
To the last question whether or not language diversity a communication or a source of enrichment, I will say that language diversity bears both a communication and a source of enrichment. Language diversity emerges because there is different in vocabularies, naming, etc. To refer a thing, sometimes people from different region mention different names. Here is the example of varieties. Still they are different; they become a bridge of communication. They function as a mean to communicate between people. That is also the nature of language as a tool of communication.
Language also becomes a source of enrichment. Here, as I said, vocabularies become the source of enrichment. We can expand our vocabularies building. A simple example is English. English used to have small numbers of vocabularies. It expands because it borrows, lends, combines other language. Many languages in this world have been used by English as vocabularies building. Words like lava (Indonesian), jilbab, pachyderm, etc. English uses for instance, Javanese, Malay, Latin, Arabic, Japanese, etc. English is quit adaptive to changes and therefore Englsih is acceptable to other countries in this world.
In conclusion, towards the resistance and prejudice to English, at least we can still get benefits of this language and this media. To preserve the language, what is needed is the awareness of society. Toward cultural and behavioral changing, we should be able to differentiate what is good and bad by seeing our cultures. After all, we can not ignore the position of English in the globalization. It is the spirit of the new changing. Internet as other media must have benefits and caveats. It is all coming back to us which way we choose. May the indigenous languages become a new inspiration to develop new technologies for the better condition of this world cultures especially in languages.




REFERENCE
Internet Worlds Stats. (2009). Top Ten Language Used in Internet. Retrieved on July 9, 2010 from www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm
Kramarae, Cherish. (n.d.). The Language and the Nature of the Internet: the Meaning of Global. London: SAGE Publications.
Silverstone, Roger. (1999). What’s New about Media?. London: SAGE Publications.
Anonym. (n.d.). Why a Global Language? Englsih is a the Global Language.