The STYLISTIC USAGE IN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT IN MURDER CASE

Alfiah Pratiwi; Waode Surya Darmadali

doi:10.24252/elite.v9i1.27573

Alfiah Pratiwi Universitas Sembilan belas November Kolaka
(ID)
Waode Surya Darmadali Alauddin Islamic State university of Makassar
(ID)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24252/elite.v9i1.27573

Keywords: Schemes, Tropes, Stylistic Devices.

Abstract

This research aims to find out what stylistic devices that are occurred in Preliminary Investigation Report of murder cases, and describe the use of the stylistic devices in the analysis of confession and truth of a suspect that has been confirmed as cases committed in a criminal conspiracy. This research is a descriptive qualitative assisted with quantitative data. This research took place in the Makassar State Prosecutor’s Office and was held during April until July 2014. The data sources of this research are the Preliminary Investigation Report of three murder cases. The findings show that (1) the types of schemes that are most frequently used are parenthesis and periphrasis. The tropes which are most frequently used are euphemism and hyperbole. (2) The stylistic devices can be used to indicate and analyze confession and the truth. The suspect in the murder case mostly used hyperbole when they confessed the crime and showed their true remorse. They used euphemisms to mention the condition of their victims’ families. The truth can be revealed by seeing the consistency of their words and their arrangement of words.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arikunto, S. 2010. Media Pembelajaran. Surakarta: Yuma Putaka.

Bachari, A.D. 2014. Pengalihan Topik dalam Proses Penyidikan Sebagai Sebuah Strateti Pencapaian Tujuan Institusional Kepolisian. Konferensi Internasional Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia. Lampung.

Brooke, G.L. 1970. The Language of Dickens. London: Andre Deutsch Limited.

Carter, R. and Simpson, P. 1989. Language, Discourse, and Literature. An Introductory Reader in Discourse Stylistics. New Zealand: Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Coulthard, R.M. 1997. A Failed Appeal, Forensic Linguistics, 4 ii 287-3-2.

Coulthard, R.M. 2000. “Whose Text Is It?” On The Linguistic Investigation of Authorship, in S. Sarangi and R.M. Coulthard: Discourse and Social Life. London: Longman.

Coulthard, R.M., & Johnson, A. 2007. An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. Oxford: Routledge.

Cummings, M., and Simmons, R. 1983. The Language and Literature: A Stylistic Introduction to The Study of Literature. England: Pergamon Press

Dallyono R., et al. 2014. The Use of Hedges and Boosters as Rhetorical Devices in The Construction of Speeches. Konferensi Internasional Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia. Lampung.

Eagleson, R., et al. 1994. “Forensic Analysis of Personal Written Texts: A Case Study Study”, John Gibbson (ed.), Language and The Law. London: Longman.

Enkvist, Nils Erik. 1973. Linguistic Stylistics. Mouton: The Hague.

Gudjohnsson, G.H. 2006. “The Psychology of Interrogations, and Confessions”. In T.W. (ed.), Investigative Interviewing: Rights, Research, and Regulations (pp 123-146). United Kingdom: Willian Publishing.

Hermawan, R. 2014. Diskrepansi Informasi dalam Berita Acara Penyidikan Polisi: Sebuah Studi Kasus Tingkat Akurasi BAP Polisis di Indonesia. Konferensi Internasional Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia. Lampung.

Jorgensen, M. & Phillips, L.J. 2002. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: Sage Publications.

Keraf, Gorys. 2007. Diksi dan Gaya Bahasa. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Muniroh, R.D. 2014. Strategi Pertanyaan Penyidik dan Implikasinya untuk Pengungkapan Kebenaran. Konferensi Internasional Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia. Lampung.

Olson, John. 2008. Forensic Linguistics, Second Edition. London: Cont.