Article Sidebar

Submitted
January 18, 2024
Accepted
July 27, 2024
Published
August 1, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 271 Download : 76

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This research was conducted due to the importance of speaking strategies that advocates in court should possess. This study aims to describe the advocate’s speaking strategies in court, seen from the plea and exception drafts, and to see how they can be implemented in advocate professional education in Indonesia. The type of this research is qualitative descriptive using a descriptive analysis approach. The data are plea and exception drafts, notes, and court minutes. The data were collected through observation, interviews, recording, and collecting the the collection of plea and exception drafts. The validity of the data was assured by using semantic validity. The data was analyzed by reducing and presenting the data and drawing conclusions. The results showed that the speaking strategy used mainly by the advocate at the trial was straightforward speaking strategies with positive politeness pleasantries, which was 52.6%. Meanwhile, the lowest number of speaking strategies found in the draft were straightforward speaking strategies without any form of pleasantries, and it was 9.1%. Based on these data, the concept of a speaking strategy has been implemented, although there are still various obstacles and shortcomings. The challenges that arise include advances in technological development, mastery of the concept of speaking strategies, and digital-based learning components. Involvement and engagement with various elements are helpful for the advancement of professional training of prospective advocates in order to achieve the vision, mission, and expected goals.

Keywords

Speaking strategies Defendant of Criminal Matters Implementation and Challenges Speaking strategies Advocate of Criminal Matters Implementation and Challenges

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Deri Wan Minto, Dadang S. Anshori, Vismaia Sabariah Damaianti, Andoyo Sastromiharjo, Ananda Putriani

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Author Biographies

Deri Wan Minto, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Doctoral Student at Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Lecturer at Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama, West Sumatra, INDONESIA

Dadang S. Anshori, Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Vismaia Sabariah Damaianti, Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Andoyo Sastromiharjo, Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Ananda Putriani, Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

Indonesian Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, INDONESIA

How to Cite
Minto, D. W., Anshori, D. S., Damaianti, V. S., Sastromiharjo, A., & Putriani, A. (2024). Analysis of Advocates’ Speaking Strategies in Criminal Case Defense: Its Implementation and Challenges. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 9(2), 279–304. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v9i2.32613
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdelhady, S., & Alkinj, M. (2023). A pragmatic analysis of ostensible lies in high-context cultures. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2023.2241275
  2. Abdi, R., Rizi, M. T., & Tavakoli, M. (2010). The cooperative principle in discourse communities and genres: A framework for the use of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1669–1679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.001
  3. Afghari, A. (2007). A sociopragmatic study of apology speaking act realization patterns in Persian. Speaking Communication, 49(3), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2007.01.003
  4. Agiyanto, U., Absori, A., Surbakti, N., Raharjo, T., & Ikhwan, A. (2021). Advocate Legal Education in Indonesia: The Need of Spiritual Dimensions Approach. Al-Risalah: Forum Kajian Hukum Dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan, 21(1), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.30631/al-risalah.v21i1.742
  5. Alabdali, T. S. (2019). Revisiting Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theory: A Middle-Eastern Perspective. Bulletin of Advanced English Studies, 2(2), 73–78. https://doi.org/10.31559/baes2019.2.2.3
  6. AlAfnan, M. A., & Oshchepkova, T. (2022). A Speaking Act Analysis of the United Nations Secretary-General’s Opening Remarks to the General Assembly Emergency Special Session on Ukraine. Studies in Media and Communication, 10(2), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v10i2.5662
  7. Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2018). The l2 motivational self system: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(4), 721–754. https://doi.org/10.14746/SSLLT.2018.8.4.2
  8. Antonopoulou, K., Begkos, C., & Zhu, Z. (2023). Staying afloat amidst extreme uncertainty: A case study of digital transformation in Higher Education. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122603
  9. Barkworth, J. M., & Murphy, K. (2015). Procedural justice policing and citizen compliance behaviour: the importance of emotion. Psychology, Crime and Law, 21(3), 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2014.951649
  10. Bertil Malmberg. (1963). Structural Linguistics and Human Communication. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-662-13066-7
  11. Boccaccini, M. T., Boothby, J. L., & Brodsky, S. L. (2004). Development and Effects of Client Trust in Criminal Defense Attorneys: Preliminary Examination of the Congruence Model of Trust Development. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.584
  12. Boroujeni, S. S., & Mansouri, S. (2023). Speaking Act Theory: An Inter/Intra-cultural Study of Apology in Communication between Spouses. In Discourse & Society (Vol. 11, Issue 1).
  13. Bortfeld, H. (2002). 2 What Native and Non-Native Speakers’ Images for Idioms Tell Us About Figurative Language. In Bilingual Sentence Processing-R.R. Heredia and J. Altarriba.
  14. Bruce Fraser. (1990). Perspectives On Politeness. Jurnal Of Pragmatics, 4(1), 219–235.
  15. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness : Some Universals in Language Usage. (J. J. Gumperz, Ed.) Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
  16. Bushway, S. D., & Redlich, A. D. (2012). Is Plea Bargaining in the “Shadow of the Trial” a Mirage? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28(3), 437–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-011-9147-5
  17. Caballero, J. A., Vergis, N., Jiang, X., & Pell, M. D. (2018). The sound of im/politeness. Speaking Communication, 102, 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2018.06.004
  18. Castro, E. (2018). Complex adaptive systems, language advising, and motivation: A longitudinal case study with a Brazilian student of English. System, 74, 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.03.004
  19. Chejnová, P. (2021). Apology as a multifunctional speaking act in Czech students’ e-mails to their lecturer. Journal of Pragmatics, 183, 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.07.006
  20. Clyne, M. (2006). Some thoughts on pragmatics, sociolinguistic variation, and intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2006.005
  21. Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3
  22. Dai, M., Frank, J., & Sun, I. (2011). Procedural justice during police-citizen encounters: The effects of process-based policing on citizen compliance and demeanor. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.01.004
  23. De Bot, K. (1992). A Bilingual Production Model: Levelt’s ’Speaking’Model Adapted Downloaded from. In Applied Linguistics (Vol. 1). I © Oxford University Press. http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/
  24. Deveugele, M. (2015). Communication training: Skills and beyond. Patient Education and Counseling, 98(10), 1287–1291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.08.011
  25. Deveugele, M., Derese, A., De Maesschalck, S., Willems, S., Van Driel, M., & De Maeseneer, J. (2005). Teaching communication skills to medical students, a challenge in the curriculum? Patient Education and Counseling, 58(3 SPEC. ISS.), 265–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.004
  26. Dowlatabadi, H., Mehri, E., & Tajabadi, A. (2014). Politeness Strategies in Conversation Exchange: The Case of Council for Dispute Settlement in Iran. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 411–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.434
  27. Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2010). Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behaviour: Perceptions of social situations and strategic usage of request patterns. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2262–2281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.02.001
  28. Eny Rahayu, Y., & Wahyudin, A. (2019). Metaphorical Expressions in News Discourses of Setya Novanto’s Graft Case. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 297. Atlatis Press
  29. Gagné, N. O. (2010). Reexamining the notion of negative face in the Japanese Socio linguistic politeness of request. Language and Communication, 30(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2009.12.001
  30. Grewal, D., Herhausen, D., Ludwig, S., & Villarroel Ordenes, F. (2022). The Future of Digital Communication Research: Considering Dynamics and Multimodality. Journal of Retailing, 98(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2021.01.007
  31. Griffiths, C., & Oxford, R. L. (2014). The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: Introduction to this special issue. System, 43(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.009
  32. Handayanti. (2019). Vonis 20 Tahun Terhadap Jessica Kumala Wongso. Jurnal Kewarganegaraan, 3(2). https://journal.upy.ac.id/index.php/pkn
  33. Hasnain, M., Mehboob, B., & Imran, S. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in sports trauma: a mini review on strengths and limits of open AI application. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 3(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-023-00093-1
  34. Hellbernd, N., & Sammler, D. (2016). Prosody conveys speaker’s intentions: Acoustic cues for speaking act perception. Journal of Memory and Language, 88, 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.01.001
  35. Hill, B., Ide, S., Ikuta, S., Kawasaki, A., & Ogino, T. (1986). Universals Of Linguistic Politeness Quantitative Evidence From Japanese And American English. In Journal of Pragmatics (Vol. 10).
  36. Holtgraves, T., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2017). Experimental approaches to linguistic (im)politeness. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness (pp. 381–401). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_15
  37. House, J., & Kádár, D. Z. (2023). A new critique of the binary first- and second-order distinction in politeness research. Journal of Pragmatics, 213, 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.06.001
  38. Jason, B. (2010). Rethinking Attorney-Client Privilege (Vol. 87). https://perma.cc/QZM8-Y7AT];
  39. Katyeudo, K. K., & de Souza, R. A. C. (2022). Digital Transformation towards Education 4.0. Informatics in Education, 21(2), 283–309. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.13
  40. Kecskes, I. (2015). Intercultural impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 86, 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.023
  41. Keren, G. S. M. (2016). Directness and Indirectness Across Cultures. First published
  42. Kharisma, A. (2018). Strategi Ketidaksantunan Praktisi Hukum Terhadap Saksi Ahli Dalam Sidang Jessica Kumala Wongso (Issue 1). https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/ni/article/view/35796
  43. Kramer, G. M., Wolbransky, M., & Heilbrun, K. (2007). Plea bargaining recommendations by criminal defense attorneys: Evidence strength, potential sentence, and advocate preference. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25(4), 573–585. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.759
  44. Le Pair, R. (1996). Spanish Request Strategies: A Cross-Cultural Analysis From An Intercultural Perspective. In Language Sciences (Vol. 18).
  45. Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East-West divide? In Journal of Politeness Research (Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp. 137–206). https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.009
  46. Lin, Y. H. (2009). Query preparatory modals: Cross-linguistic and cross-situational variations in request modification. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(8), 1636–1656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.007
  47. Lindblom, K. (2001). Cooperating with Grice" A cross-disciplinary metaperspective on uses of Grice’s cooperative principle *. In Inter-national Journal of Language and Communication (Vol. 33). www.elsevier.coml/locate/pragma
  48. Longcope, P. (1995). The Universality of Face in Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theory: A Japanese Perspective. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED386032.pdf
  49. Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory : “Face” revisited and renewed. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90025-6.
  50. Mahsun. 2007. Metodologi Penelitian Bahasa: Tahap Strategi, Metode dan Tekniknya. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
  51. Martínez-Adrián, M., Gallardo-del-Puerto, F., & Basterrechea, M. (2019). On self-reported use of communication strategies by CLIL learners in primary education. Language Teaching Research, 23(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817722054
  52. Metcalfe, C., & Baker, T. (2022). Race, Ethnicity, Justice, and Self-Regulating Beliefs among a Sample of Justice-Involved Men and Women. Race and Justice. https://doi.org/10.1177/21533687221075737
  53. Minto, D. W., Damaianti, V. S., Anshori, D. S., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2023). Deddy Corbuzier’s Speaking Strategy on a YouTube Podcast (pp. 60–69). https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-144-9_8.
  54. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, M. (1992). Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia
  55. Moore, J., Plano Clark, V. L., Foote, L. A., & Dariotis, J. K. (2020). Attorney–Client Communication in Public Defense: A Qualitative Examination. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 31(6), 908–938. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403419861672
  56. Moura, D., Costa, M. J., Pereira, A. T., Macedo, A., & Figueiredo-Braga, M. (2022). Communication skills preparedness for practice: Is there a key ingredient in undergraduate curricula design? Patient Education and Counseling, 105(3), 756–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.06.034
  57. Nambiar, S. S. (2023). Comparison of the Structured Consent Process Using Modified Delphi Technique with the Standard Process in Obtaining Informed Consent for Procedures in ENT by PHASE III MBBS Students. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, 75(3), 1557–1567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-023-03546-2
  58. Nizar, M., & Sabardi, L. (2019). Ajaran Kausalitas Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 498 K/Pid/2016) (Vol. 7, Issue 1).
  59. Noam Chomsky. (2015). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England
  60. Nureddeen, F. A. (2008). Cross cultural pragmatics: Apology strategies in Sudanese Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(2), 279–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.11.001
  61. O’Driscoll, J. (2007). Brown & Levinson’s face: How it can-and can’t-help us to understand interaction across cultures. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4(4), 463–492. https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2007.024
  62. Ogban Uwen, S. (2020). Politeness Strategies In Lawyer-Client Interactions In English In Selected Law Firms In Calabar, Cross River State. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339956230
  63. Paskewitz, E. A., & Beck, S. J. (2021). “Put the phone away!”: Does text message content influence perceptions of group member texting? Computers in Human Behavior, 115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106591
  64. Pawlak, M. (2021). Investigating language learning strategies: Prospects, pitfalls and challenges. Language Teaching Research, 25(5), 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819876156
  65. Peng, Z., & Phakiti, A. (2022). What a Directed Motivational Current Is to Language Teachers. Relc Journal, 53(1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220905376
  66. Pinto, D. (2019). Shifting responsibilities: Student e-mail excuses and how faculty perceive them. Lingua, 222, 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.03.006
  67. Rahayu, S. (2018). Konstruksi Teks Pada Media Kompas dalam Pemberitaan Kasus Setyanovanto. 1(1). https://ojs.unsiq.ac.id/index.php/resolusi/article/view/155
  68. Raifu Olanrewaju, F., Alli, O., & Ademola, W. (2020). Interpreting and Markers in Nigerian Courtroom Discourse. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 11(3), 24. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.11n.3p.24
  69. Read, C. (2024). The practice of metaphor in conversation: an ecological integrational approach. Language Sciences, 101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2023.101588
  70. Redlich, A. D., Bushway, S. D., & Norris, R. J. (2016). Plea decision-making by attorneys and judges. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12(4), 537–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9264-0
  71. Reich, W. (2011). The cooperative nature of communicative acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1349–1365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.024
  72. Rejeki, S., & Azizah, A. N. (2019). Politeness Strategies Performed by EFL Learners’ with English Native Speakers in Medical Students. Humaniora, 10(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v10i1.5312
  73. Rosenbaum, S. A. (2014). Beyond the Fakultas’ Four Walls: Linking Education, Practice, and the Legal Profession (Vol. 395). http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/pubs
  74. Rundquist, S. (1992). Indirectness: A gender study of flouting Grice’s maxims. In Journal of Pragmatics (Vol. 18).
  75. Sampson, R. J. (2015). Tracing motivational emergence in a classroom language learning project. System, 50, 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.03.001
  76. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., Howard, S. K., & Tondeur, J. (2023). Gender divides in teachers’ readiness for online teaching and learning in higher education: Do women and men consider themselves equally prepared? Computers and Education, 199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104774
  77. Sell, F., Renkwitz, K., Sickinger, P., & Schneider, K. P. (2019). Measuring pragmatic competence on the functional and lexical level: The development of German high-school students’ requests during a stay abroad in Canada. Journal of Pragmatics, 146, 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.005
  78. Septiana, A., & Haristiani, N. (2021). The Use of Politeness Strategy in Criticizing Speaking Acts in Japanese. Atlantis Press
  79. Sifianou, M. (2013). The impact of globalisation on politeness and impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 55, 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.016
  80. Song, S. (2017). The Brown and Levinson theory revisited: A statistical analysis. Language Sciences, 62, 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2017.03.006
  81. Spencer-Oatey, H. (2011). Conceptualising “the relational” in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3565–3578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009
  82. Spivak, Y., Omelchenko, S., Petrova, M. M., Kurinna, S., & Kurinnyi, I. (2021). Socio-Pedagogical Conditionsof Future Social SpecialiststTraining for Successful Professional Career. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(4), 1. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n4p1
  83. Tsohatzidis, S. L. (1993). A Paradox Of Cooperation In The Conversational Calculus. In Language & Communication (Vol. 13, Issue 4). Language & Communication. Vol. 13, No. 4.
  84. Wang, K., Li, B., Tian, T., Zakuan, N., & Rani, P. (2023). Evaluate the drivers for digital transformation in higher education institutions in the era of industry 4.0 based on decision-making method. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100364
  85. Widodo, A. (2019b). Model Komunikasi Penegak Hukum dalam Ruang Persidangan di Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat. Jurnal Penelitian Komunikasi, 22(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.20422/jpk.v22i2.660
  86. Widodo, A. (2022). Dramatisme Terdakwa di Ruang Pengadilan. Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 19(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.24002/jik.v19i1.3600
  87. Widodo, A., & Rahmat Hidayat, D. (2018). The Pattern of Communication Legal Advisor with advocate In Indonesian Courtroom. In International Journal of Engineering & Technology (Vol. 7). www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/IJET
  88. Wolfson, N., & Manes, J. (1980). The compliment as a social strategy. Paper in Linguistics, 13(3), 391–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818009370503