Instructions for ispacs 2003 Camera-Ready Manuscript

Journal of Research and Innovation in Language
 
Available online at: 
 
http://ojs.journal.unilak.ac.id/index.php/reila
Vol. 1, No. 3, December 2019, pp. 111-117
112 
According to Halliday (2003), "Almost every 
saying have an ideational meaning, which is related to 
processes and things from the real world, and an 
interpersonal meaning, related to the role and attitude 
adopted and assigned by the speaker" (p. 83). The act 
of politeness becomes an inseparable part and is 
limited by socio-culture where the settings are 
applied. For example, level of courtesy greetings can 
be expressed as sayings like "Good morning", "Good 
afternoon", 
"Hi", 
and 
"Hello", 
whereas 
like 
Indonesian, questions like "Where are you going?" 
answer with expressions like "There". In other words, 
cultural differences tend to bring up different ways of 
expressing the act of politeness. Speech rated being 
polite in a cultural setting can be considered rude in 
other settings.
As a result, it is necessary to cross-cultural 
interlocutors to realize the differences that exist in 
realizing speech degree of politeness according to 
linguistics and socio-cultural aspects that are used as 
politeness action parameters. The result that is always 
needed to reconstruct speech in language while 
maintaining a degree of politeness contained in 
general, accurate, and acceptable language, be it 
original, translation, or rendering back — success in 
maintaining a degree of politeness of interpersonal 
speech in a language and restructure them in other 
languages. The language implies dynamic or 
achievement functional equality between the two 
languages. Maintenance of politeness Interpersonal 
speech requires maintenance socio-cultural aspects 
involved in production sayings in various languages. 
The phenomenon, culture is a homogeneous 
internal, even though it is different. As a result, the 
scholars came out with claims that the faces and the 
principle of politeness were general (Terkourafi, 
1005). In response to these arguments, the second 
group of scholars concentrated on the definition and 
existence of decency norms in all cultural differences. 
They believe in variations of politeness across 
cultures or in culture. In view of this heterogeneity, 
the universal nature of the concept of modesty may 
not be acceptable for all cultures, and the role of the 
recipient in evaluating politeness is also essential and 
significant, contrasting with the theories put forward 
by the first group. 
Furthermore, politeness is no longer only refers to 
the strategy used between the speaker and the listener. 
It modified to include exchange studies in certain 
situations (Terkourafi, 1005). Thus, Leech (1005) 
proposes his new theory namely Grand Strategy of 
Politeness, in which he modified the previous 
courtesy theory (1983) to discuss politeness strategies 
and social factors that can influence their use in every 
act of communication in cultures other than the West. 
The act of politeness becomes an inseparable part 
and is limited by socio-culture where the settings are 
applied. For example, level of courtesy greetings can 
be expressed as sayings like "Good morning", "Good 
afternoon", 
"Hi", 
and 
"Hello", 
whereas 
like 
Indonesian, questions like "Where are you going?" 
answer with expressions like "There". In other words, 
cultural differences tend to bring up different ways of 
expressing the act of politeness. Speech rated being 
polite in a cultural setting can be considered rude in 
other settings. As a result, it is necessary to cross-
cultural interlocutors to realize the differences that 
exist in realizing speech degree of politeness 
according to linguistics and socio-cultural aspects that 
are used as politeness action parameters. The result 
that is always needed to reconstruct speech in 
language while maintaining a degree of politeness 
contained in general, accurate, and acceptable 
language, be it original, translation, or rendering back 
— success in maintaining a degree of politeness of 
interpersonal speech in a language and restructure 
them in other languages. The language implies 
dynamic or achievement functional equality between 
the two languages. Maintenance of politeness 
Interpersonal speech requires maintenance socio-
cultural aspects involved in production sayings in 
various languages. 
The hints of politeness in the non-verbal form 
have 
used 
Verbal 
theory 
politeness, 
where 
instructions are interpreted through coding techniques 
in interpretive techniques applied in verbal politeness 
theory reviews. The term intangible is used here to 
emphasize facts that politeness is a variant of meaning. 
Thus, it concerns what is behind the form perceived 
by our visual senses. After the instructions are 
interpreted, actions for decency are presented, taken 
from real-life daily practices. Silence, gestures, gifts, 
observance of norms, rules and regulation are part of 
the form of non-verbal communication. The purpose 
of this paper is to want the reader to know why 
politeness is an essential thing in life relations in 
verbal and non-verbal communication are needed.
Therefore, This paper focuses on exploring politeness 
strategies put forward by Brown and Levinson (1978) 
related to verbal and non-verbal communication. The 
purpose of this paper to give information that each 
interlocutor must maintain the speaker's self-esteem. 
This strategy must be used in verbal and non-verbal 
communication.